BlackBerry PlayBook prices have dropped by $200 across the board in the US. …

Share this story

The BlackBerry PlayBook price cuts have arrived in the US, without any messing around with gift cards: the tablets now start at $299.99 for 16GB at Best Buy, a $200 discount. The question is whether anyone will care, with the imminent arrival of the new Kindle Fire.

The day after Amazon announced its $199 Android-based tablet, the Kindle Fire, Best Buy looks eager to get its PlayBook stock moving. If 16GB isn't enough PlayBook for you, the 32GB model is now $399.99 and the 64GB costs $499.99.

The PlayBook was derided on its launch for lacking basic features like a native e-mail and calendar app if customers didn’t have a corresponding BlackBerry phone. RIM has promised that a coming 2.0 software update in October will fix this among other problems, but even with these steep discounts, the tablet is in serious danger of irrelevance.

Share this story

Casey Johnston
Casey Johnston is the former Culture Editor at Ars Technica, and now does the occasional freelance story. She graduated from Columbia University with a degree in Applied Physics. Twitter@caseyjohnston

158 Reader Comments

If the price cut is universal, then people who not live outside of US (thus no easy way of buying the Fire) will care (a little bit). That's said, I would rather pay $100 extra to import the Fire than wasting my money on the Playbook.

The more interesting question is this: would people want the $99 Touchpad or the $199 Fire?

I think everyone out there selling an Android tablet, and even Apple with their iPad has to be looking at the pricing of their tablets *very* carefully now. I think the Nook started the ball rolling, but this shot across the bow by Amazon looks to shake a lot of stuff up. If RIM can make *any* money at that price, they'd be well advised to keep the prices where they are.

The more interesting question is this: would people want the $99 Touchpad or the $199 Fire?

If the Fire can be rooted to run as a regular tablet without Amazon's interference, then Fire. Otherwise, touch or neither.

Edit... oh, you asked about "people" ... I usually don't think the same way as people-in-general. We'll probably have to wait and see what real battery life is on the Fire whether it's worth it for color. Also whether the backlight can be dimmed enough for comfortable reading in the dark.

I think everyone out there selling an Android tablet, and even Apple with their iPad has to be looking at the pricing of their tablets *very* carefully now. I think the Nook started the ball rolling, but this shot across the bow by Amazon looks to shake a lot of stuff up. If RIM can make *any* money at that price, they'd be well advised to keep the prices where they are.

Since when has Apple cared about what the competition is doing? In a day and age where you can get an 8 gb MP3 player with removable media and user replaceable battery for $50, Apple can still sell its ipod nano for $150.

Many people don't seem to care about what it can do, that logo is worth all the extra money.

This was a long time coming, Kindle Fire or not. It's just funny how everyone decided to blindly follow in Apple's footsteps following the iPad's smashing success. It really goes to show how short-sighted companies can be, not able to see whether a product would be successful or not. It's this very lack of short-sightedness that made Apple successful. Apple knows if a product will be successful or not, at least in the majority of cases.

What puzzles me is how did a company such as RIM, capable of making such horrid business decisions, and lacking in vision, become so successful in the smartphone market?

If the price cut is universal, then people who not live outside of US (thus no easy way of buying the Fire) will care (a little bit). That's said, I would rather pay $100 extra to import the Fire than wasting my money on the Playbook.

The more interesting question is this: would people want the $99 Touchpad or the $199 Fire?

If the price cut is universal, then people who not live outside of US (thus no easy way of buying the Fire) will care (a little bit). That's said, I would rather pay $100 extra to import the Fire than wasting my money on the Playbook.

The more interesting question is this: would people want the $99 Touchpad or the $199 Fire?

If the price cut is universal, then people who not live outside of US (thus no easy way of buying the Fire) will care (a little bit). That's said, I would rather pay $100 extra to import the Fire than wasting my money on the Playbook.

The more interesting question is this: would people want the $99 Touchpad or the $199 Fire?

Since when has Apple cared about what the competition is doing? In a day and age where you can get an 8 gb MP3 player with removable media and user replaceable battery for $50, Apple can still sell its ipod nano for $150.

Many people don't seem to care about what it can do, that logo is worth all the extra money.

The problem is, you can 'not care' for a limited period of time, until other manufacturers start catching up. Do you think Apple doesn't care about Android? On the contrary, they're scared.

The manufacturers need to understand that there's a huge discontinuity between what they are telling us we want, and what we actually want. The TouchPad fire sale showed that people are not opposed to tablets (as consumption devices), but at steeply discounted prices. The companies that don't embrace that and continue selling $500+ devices will fail until the manufacturing cost comes down.

>> ARTICLE: The question is whether anyone will care, with the imminent arrival of the new Kindle Fire.

Yes, I do care. Especially when the PlayBook is expected to run Android apps soon.

Nothing personal against the Kindle Fire. On the contrary. But I just prefer the PlayBook format. Neither I subscribe to the idea that the only way to compete with the iPad is to lower the price. There's a big enough tech gadget market out there for other solutions to generate profit and promote growth.

I have a PlayBook. It's decent, but seriously lacking in support. You can't even access the App World unless you're connected to Wi-Fi. (We mostly tether them to our BlackBerries, which is natively supported.) None of the apps can access intranet resources, even when you're bridged through the BES. The VPN profiles are awkward and as mentioned before, the tablet is useless without a BlackBerry nearby. Sigh.

>> Neither I subscribe to the idea that the only way to compete with the iPad is to lower the price. There's a big enough tech gadget market out there for other solutions to generate profit and promote growth.

I agree.

I find it odd that the list price on a new Android cell phone is about $500-600with a package deal price at $200-250 in the US, and yet the sweet spot for tablet pricing seems to be lower than phones even though more is expected of the tablets overall minus that one little feature (phone calls).

Consumers larger are willing to pay a premium for cell phone service. A significant percentage are willing to pay a premium for the Apple logo. There is certainly room for higher priced but well-selling Android devices in the market if another killer feature can be identified.

Just make my i5 Win8 tablet already and you will get 1000-1500$ per unit. Why do those tech companies want part in the low margin toy market anyway?

Your dream product would only appeal to a very small group of people, and for that price, people expect a premium laptop. Everyone's trying to get a slice of that sweet, sweet ipad pie, but no one can match Apple's level of polish and marketing.

I picked up a firesale touchpad, and it's still an underwhelming experience, but I wouldn't trade it straight across for a playbook. Let's see how long RIM pretends it's a viable product before they drop them to $100 to clear stock.

>> ARTICLE: The question is whether anyone will care, with the imminent arrival of the new Kindle Fire.

Yes, I do care. Especially when the PlayBook is expected to run Android apps soon.

Nothing personal against the Kindle Fire. On the contrary. But I just prefer the PlayBook format. Neither I subscribe to the idea that the only way to compete with the iPad is to lower the price. There's a big enough tech gadget market out there for other solutions to generate profit and promote growth.

Did you really just try to use the Playbook as an example that a tablet priced like the iPad (that isn't the iPad) can sell well?

Sir, I think you may need a bit of a reality check. It was obsolete by the time it even hit the market and almost no one has bought one. It's the single worst example of the point you were trying to make.

I won't pay money for a tablet under 10in no matter what the price. I already have a smartphone, and 10in is small enough as it is. 7in is just worthless in my book.

Books are usually around 7 inches in diameter. Some tablets are meant mostly for reading (webpages, books, emails), it makes sense to size them as such. You don't need big screen landscape when you're not writing documents, drawing pictures, or creating presentations. It's a fullscreen only OS after all.

Since when has Apple cared about what the competition is doing? In a day and age where you can get an 8 gb MP3 player with removable media and user replaceable battery for $50, Apple can still sell its ipod nano for $150.

Many people don't seem to care about what it can do, that logo is worth all the extra money.

The problem is, you can 'not care' for a limited period of time, until other manufacturers start catching up. Do you think Apple doesn't care about Android? On the contrary, they're scared.

The manufacturers need to understand that there's a huge discontinuity between what they are telling us we want, and what we actually want. The TouchPad fire sale showed that people are not opposed to tablets (as consumption devices), but at steeply discounted prices. The companies that don't embrace that and continue selling $500+ devices will fail until the manufacturing cost comes down.

Apple has been "not caring" for almost 20 years now. There's a reason people call it the Apple Tax.

It's not just the Apple logo. The iPad is a frontend for the Apple App Store. The significance to me of Amazon entering the tablet wars is the methodology that they used. They built up their resources (media, apps) FIRST, then launched the devices.

I do sense quite a bit of anti-Apple flavor in this thread - more so than usual. At least concede they got this ball rolling, and it wasn't from just being pretty.

I just sold my iPad, so I am tablet-less at the moment. I wouldn't consider the Kindle Fire at all though, as its physically too small for my tastes.

If the price cut is universal, then people who not live outside of US (thus no easy way of buying the Fire) will care (a little bit). That's said, I would rather pay $100 extra to import the Fire than wasting my money on the Playbook.

The more interesting question is this: would people want the $99 Touchpad or the $199 Fire?

Everyone should just stop comparing things to the $99 Touchpad. You can't buy it. If someone were going to buy a tablet today, the Touchpad would not be an option unless they went somewhere like eBay, where the price will be more than $99.

Did you really just try to use the Playbook as an example that a tablet priced like the iPad (that isn't the iPad) can sell well?

Sir, I think you may need a bit of a reality check. It was obsolete by the time it even hit the market and almost no one has bought one. It's the single worst example of the point you were trying to make.

If you'll recall, when Blackberries came out, there was not another good email phone on the market at all. Period. Business users loved them. That's why they succeeded. That was pre-iPhone and Windows CE sucked. Now there are lots of smartphones with good email, and RIM's outlook is dim.

I'll be interested to see how easily the Kindle Fire can be converted into a fully open, fully functional Android tablet.

Just make my i5 Win8 tablet already and you will get 1000-1500$ per unit. Why do those tech companies want part in the low margin toy market anyway?

Your dream product would only appeal to a very small group of people, and for that price, people expect a premium laptop. Everyone's trying to get a slice of that sweet, sweet ipad pie, but no one can match Apple's level of polish and marketing.

Its called a very profitable niche market. See: MBP.

All the tablets that came until now are complementary devices. No one in his right mind would have a tablet as his sole computing device but if you put a real OS on one (Win8 or OS X) and attach a KB its now a possibility. Call that a multitouch laptop or a tablet, I dont care.

I think everyone out there selling an Android tablet, and even Apple with their iPad has to be looking at the pricing of their tablets *very* carefully now. I think the Nook started the ball rolling, but this shot across the bow by Amazon looks to shake a lot of stuff up. If RIM can make *any* money at that price, they'd be well advised to keep the prices where they are.

Since when has Apple cared about what the competition is doing? In a day and age where you can get an 8 gb MP3 player with removable media and user replaceable battery for $50, Apple can still sell its ipod nano for $150.

Many people don't seem to care about what it can do, that logo is worth all the extra money.

When has Apple cared about what the competition is doing? Always. Businesses that don't often go out of business. Apple has been very aggressive in price/performance on the iPad (at the low end) and it seems they want to avoid giving any room to competing full-feature tablets under their price umbrella. Naturally, those decisions are always balanced by the possibility of degrading the user experience or reducing margins. So far, Apple seems to be able to put together a package that competitors have difficulty producing competing tablets with equivalent functionality.

I don't see Apple degrading the experience so much. So, the question is whether they will accept a cut in their very high margins to squeeze the competition. What is best for their business: higher margins which give them the increased flexibility that more cash in the bank provides, or defending their market (and mind) share that will help keep the iPad train rolling? Not an easy decision, but I'd be inclined to do the latter, as Apple's balance sheet is sufficiently cash-rich that it is hard to imagine they can't invest where they want to already. I would note that even with a price cut their margins could still be very, very healthy, especially compared to the competition.

This was a long time coming, Kindle Fire or not. It's just funny how everyone decided to blindly follow in Apple's footsteps following the iPad's smashing success. It really goes to show how short-sighted companies can be, not able to see whether a product would be successful or not. It's this very lack of short-sightedness that made Apple successful. Apple knows if a product will be successful or not, at least in the majority of cases.

What puzzles me is how did a company such as RIM, capable of making such horrid business decisions, and lacking in vision, become so successful in the smartphone market?

Yep, that is true. Though the guy responsible for such accuracy is mostly likely gone forever from apple...

Since when has Apple cared about what the competition is doing? In a day and age where you can get an 8 gb MP3 player with removable media and user replaceable battery for $50, Apple can still sell its ipod nano for $150.

Many people don't seem to care about what it can do, that logo is worth all the extra money.

The problem is, you can 'not care' for a limited period of time, until other manufacturers start catching up. Do you think Apple doesn't care about Android? On the contrary, they're scared.

The manufacturers need to understand that there's a huge discontinuity between what they are telling us we want, and what we actually want. The TouchPad fire sale showed that people are not opposed to tablets (as consumption devices), but at steeply discounted prices. The companies that don't embrace that and continue selling $500+ devices will fail until the manufacturing cost comes down.

Apple has been "not caring" for almost 20 years now. There's a reason people call it the Apple Tax.

Please stop saying and repeating stupid things. The so-called "people" you refer to are largely composed mindless, anti-Apple zealots. Let's briefly review the history of this "Apple Tax" to get some perspective:

The term "Apple Tax" is response, by reactionaries, to the term "Microsoft Tax" during the Microsoft-Apple fan boy wars. "Microsoft Tax" comes from Microsoft's business practice of forcing OEMs to pay Microsoft for every unit shipped, regardless of whether any Microsoft software was installed, and regardless of whether the customer wanted Microsoft software. It was termed a "tax" because the consumer had no choice--they had to pay it (through higher prices) even if they didn't want anything to do with Microsoft. How does that compare to this so called "Apple Tax"? There is no comparison. Nobody pays Apple unless they use, or leverage (e.g., app developers and content distributors) Apple products or services. Don't want anything to do with Apple? Fine--you can buy computers, music players, phones, slates, and content that have nothing to do with Apple and Apple doesn't get your money.

I won't drag this thread down by launching another "Apple products are more, or less, expensive" flame war. Let's just acknowledge that some people believe that, even at a hardware level, Apple provides good value on some of their products. But that's irrelevant really, because the price that someone pays for the product is a reflection of the value they perceive from its purchase. Given the obvious fact that a lot of people purchase Apple products and a lot of people refuse to purchase Apple products, some people's estimation of that value is different from others.

I think everyone out there selling an Android tablet, and even Apple with their iPad has to be looking at the pricing of their tablets *very* carefully now. I think the Nook started the ball rolling, but this shot across the bow by Amazon looks to shake a lot of stuff up. If RIM can make *any* money at that price, they'd be well advised to keep the prices where they are.

Since when has Apple cared about what the competition is doing? In a day and age where you can get an 8 gb MP3 player with removable media and user replaceable battery for $50, Apple can still sell its ipod nano for $150.

Many people don't seem to care about what it can do, that logo is worth all the extra money.

Maybe people don't care about those features, but they do care about good desing, easy UI and integration with iTunes? Maybe that other mp3-player is so cheap because it's basically crap?